Why do we have electoral votes? In the past, presidential candidates have focused on states that have the most electoral votes while practically ignoring other states. Wouldn't we have real democracy if a presidential candidate won the presidency by having the popular vote, and with every vote counting?
Who thinks this "winner take all" system is fair?
Example: (The 2000 presidential election)
Gore won the popular vote with 50,996,116 votes but only had 266 electoral votes.
Bush had 50,456,169 votes but he had 271 electoral votes.
How is it fair that Bush won even though he had less overall votes? Is this democracy?
(For those of you who think I'm mad because I voted for Gore, thats not the case, I voted for Bush, but I think Gore should have won.)
2007-12-23 19:06:25 · 5 answers · asked by JAG 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I wanted Bush to win since that doesn't seem to be clear. I believe it was unfair how he won.
2007-12-23 19:48:19 · update #1
It is true that, under the current system, candidates pander to the states with the largest number of electoral votes...
In a straight popular vote, however, they would only pander to the largest population centers.
Right now, you have balance between the "coasts" (NY and CA) which are often seen as more liberal and the "center" (MI, OH, IL, IA) which are characterized as more "traditional."
If it were down to a straight popular vote, I doubt the candidates would spend a whole lot of time outside of California, New York and Florida...
When citing the vote count, keep in mind that those 50
+ million votes that each candidate received were distributed through the U.S...Without the electoral system, those votes would have likely been concentrated in two or three population centers. There must be balance between Progressive and Traditional ideology that goes beyond population numbers...the electoral process ensures this.
2007-12-23 19:27:33 · answer #1 · answered by u_bin_called 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
This ISN'T a democracy. It's a republic. Huge difference. In a democracy, if the majority vote that only blue-eyed people should pay taxes, that would happen. We have the electoral college so that it isn't simply 5 states that decide the election.
I'd like to see it overhauled so that each CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT was worth a single electoral vote. That would make more sense, and better reflect the will of the people.
2007-12-23 20:27:16 · answer #2 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That 500,000 figure might sound huge but in practice it isn't terribly so. I'm not certain I agree either with the current system, First Past The Post as us Brits call it, or the other one, Proportional Representation. That's probably your position as well.
By the way I like your honesty. Many people raise the point only to stick up for the system we have. Bloody sycophants.
2007-12-23 19:45:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The best overhaul would be.....only taxpayers should be allowed to vote! Keep the electoral college!
2007-12-23 22:20:12 · answer #4 · answered by fretochose 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you wanted Gore, why did you vote for Bush ?
2007-12-23 19:19:16 · answer #5 · answered by LindaAnn 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋